Animals in Agriculture

Less Milk, More Profit

Organic feed and rotational grazing keep this dairy green.
Christopher Shirley


LONE ROCK, Wis. –Carl Pulvermacher's rolling herd average dropped 2,000 pounds this year. And starting in '92, he won't even milk in January or February. Is this any way for a dairyman to make a living?

Pulvermacher thinks so. By relying on rotational grazing, seasonal milking and feeds grown without purchased herbicides or fertilizers, he figures cost reductions will offset lower production. And the 10- to 20-percent organic premium he receives for his milk could make his bottom line even better than when his herd averaged 20,000 pounds.

"We've got to manage our cost per hundredweight of milk, and invest less time and capital in unnecessary machinery," says Pulvermacher, who wants to bring his milk cost well below the $12.64 per hundredweight he had in '90. "We can cut feed costs dramatically for 5 or 6 months of the year with rotational grazing."

This strategy makes more sense than buying high-priced concentrates and culling every slow-breeding cow just to make more milk, says the 40-year-old dairyman. He milks 55 cows in south-west Wisconsin on his 220-acre dairy, which became certified-organic in '88. But he's been growing prize-winning crops of corn, barley and soybeans without chemicals for 10 years. (See "Organic Corn Winner & Still Champ," The New Farm, May/June '89.)

"You can really cut your off-farm inputs–almost 100 percent in our case," says Pulvermacher. His 162-bushel corn crop grown for just $1.16 per bushel was tops in his region and placed fifth in the state's maximum economic yield contest in '87.

Grazing Beats Harvesting
To make the transition to seasonal milking, Pulvermacher bred 37 cows and heifers last May for calving the first week in March '92. "To synchronize our herd, in January we'll be selling about 30 other cows–some of our best genetics– but be back milking at least 40 cows by March."

He says some dairymen can't fathom seasonal milking, though. "'You don't want to milk cows in winter? Are you lazy?' they ask" But Pulvermacher sees it as an opportunity to make the best use of his pastures, and to use some of the time off for vacation travel with his family. It also will give him some additional time to devote to the many sustainable agriculture programs he's actively involved in.

Pulvermacher began relying more on rotational grazing of his milkers just last spring. Before switching, he fed cows haylage and high-moisture ear corn twice a day for as much as 80 percent of their dry-matter intake. "The darn cows figured out that they could stand in line for feed rather than grazing in the pasture," he quips.

Now, for six months of the year, the milking herd is out foraging. In mid-April, they start rotating through alfalfa/bluegrass/ orchardgrass pasture divided into 16 paddocks. There's no way to put up feed of the quality we're grazing," says Pulvermacher.

"Carl's getting exceptional-quality feed off his grazing–and doing it cheaply," says Carl Fredericks, coordinator of the Southern Wisconsin Farmers Research Network. Pulvermacher is one of five farmers in the network participating in a state-funded study on rotational grazing.

"His forage samples consistently show more than 20 percent crude protein, with 25 to 30 percent early in the season," says Fredericks. In '90, Pulvermacher's hay fields averaged 4 tons of dry matter per acre and 26.5 per cent crude protein.

For grazing, cows spend up to a day and occasionally two days, in each paddock. Portable polywire lets Pulvermacher move the herd to the next paddock in 5 to 10 minutes. "That's a lot quicker than shaking bedding," he notes.

Dry cows and heifers follow a day behind the milkers in the paddock rotation. "We do a lot less clipping using them as a cleanup crew –usually just one clipping after the fourth grazing," observes Pulvermacher. "Clipping eliminates thistles and smoothes out uneven patches before the next grazing." After the fourth grazing, the heifers are switched to haylage.

Seeding High Quality
Starting this year, Pulvermacher plans to broadcast-seed pastures every other year with 2 pounds each of red clover, canarygrass and birdsfoot trefoil. He establishes 40 acres of hay fields each year (usually into a barley nurse crop following corn) by seeding a mix of 12 pounds of alfalfa and 2 pounds each of red clover, timothy, canarygrass and birdsfoot trefoil.

He added the trefoil to his hay mix in '89. He likes the deep-rooted legume in part because its low seedpods survive clipping at 6 inches. He'd heard that quackgrass might crowd out the trefoil but that hasn't happened. He has some quack, but likes it for forage. Cultivation keeps it manageable in his row crops, where it provides some erosion control.

To maintain soil fertility, Pulvermacher relies on dairy manure for all of his fields. On the 33 steepest acres, watering stations are three-fourths of the way up the hill. "I manure the top third or top half with a spreader, and the cattle take care of the rest. Everything else gets 12 tons of manure per acre, whether it's hay ground or crop land."

Pulvermacher installed 4,600 feet of 1-inch-diameter plastic watering pipe last April. "That gave a quick payback on a $600 investment," he says.

Feed Less, Make More
While the herd is on pasture, Pulvermacher supplements each cow's grazing with a standard ration of 15 to 17 pounds of high-moisture ear corn and 10 ounces of minerals. Cows with less than 120 days in lactation also receive up to 1 pound of roasted soybeans.

Pulvermacher contracts to have his own soybeans roasted, ensuring that all his feed is certified-organic. Most years, he grows about 11 acres of soybeans and 35 to 45 acres of corn. The minerals are the only off-farm purchase in the feed.

Standard winter rations include 20 to 25 pounds of ear corn, 4 pounds of roasted beans, and some hay and haylage. Calves get 5 pounds of ear corn and free choice of hay.

Pulvermacher likes feeding ear corn. "My corn is cheap –less than a nickel a pound. And it's good for body condition. With reduced feed costs now that we're grazing more –and transporting and storing less–I figure we're saving a dollar per cow a day." Pulvermacher stores ear corn as high-moisture corn in a 14. by 70-foot silo and haylage in a second silo.

Since organic certification limits some treatment options, Pulvermacher keeps a careful eye on herd health. We're on a vigorous herd-health program now, with 80 percent of my annual vet bill for vaccines, preventive care and nutrition work rather than treating acute problems."

An experienced veterinarian–Marta Engle of Soldiers Grove, Wis. – taught Pulvermacher how to use homeopathic remedies, which rely on minute doses of herbal or other natural preparations to help solve health or breeding problems. "We started using homeopathic approaches three years ago, when we knew we'd be applying for organic certification. I don't like the added time and patience that homeopathic remedies require, but they've worked in our dairy."

For acute concerns, though, Pulvermacher says he might let the vet intervene with antibiotics, to fight a bad case of mastitis, for example. "If a cow will still eat, you can take care of mastitis in ways other than antibiotics, which would require a 30-day milk withdrawal," he says.

"Keeping a cow's environment dry is a key part of preventing mastitis, plus proper milking," he notes. So Pulvermacher keeps his cows outside as much as possible, even in winter. "The manure freezes, and cows are on a clean bedding pack. It beats letting the cows lay in a building where it stays dirty. And cows have access to shelter when there's snow or sleet, which is about 4 or 5 days of the month."

Pulvermacher uses a conventional wormer at vaccination time for stock under 1 year old. He hasn't had any parasite problems with stock.

He thinks the carefully controlled grazing will provide additional benefits beyond cutting feed costs. "I expect rotational grazing's more natural environment to payoff in easier breeding. Cows with breeding difficulties during the winter are responding well to grass, and I figure they'll be pregnant next winter," he says. "If I can get cows and heifers to breed when I want, and forage when I want, they'll pay their way."


Reproduced with permission of the publisher. The New Farm, Sept/Oct. 1991, p. 13-17.

Natural Grazing —Super-Natural Benefits

'Modern prairie' boosts pasture production
David Schafer

To ensure a tight calving season, we try to follow grazing researcher Jim Wiltbank's six principles for effective reproduction:
TRENTON, Mo. –Like the Robert Frost poem, we've discovered that taking the road less traveled "has made all the difference." In the mid-'80s, we converted our cropland to pasture, and started managing our livestock and forages more like the prairie ecosystem that once grew here.

The difference has been a leap in biodiversity (especially legumes and other desirable species), a longer grazing season and thicker forage stands. Healthier forages have improved soil structure and water retention, reducing erosion and making our farm less susceptible to drought.

Our livestock are healthier and happier too. We have 70 purebred Gelbvieh cows and run up to 40 stockers and 300 sheep on about 350 acres of pasture. That's about 50 percent more stock than we carried before we subdivided pastures and intensified our management.

Choosing this different road has made our life simpler and our problems fewer. We have time for community activities and travel, and we don't need off-farm jobs. Alice, my partner and wife, sums it up best: "Isn't this the greatest life!"

Harsh Reality
Life wasn't always so sweet or simple. After growing up in the city and pursuing urban careers, we welcomed the opportunity to start farming my grandparents' land in 1980. Our original goal was to become conventional superfarmers. We steadily increased corn and oats yields during our first three years.

Then reality hit us hard. A simple soil-depth analysis revealed that some of our best cropland had only 2 inches of topsoil left! But there was a ray of hope. An adjacent hayfield still had 8 inches of topsoil. That amount was only half of what was there originally, but the significance was clear. We laid two options before the family farm corporation: Strip crop or put everything into forages.

Big changes are hard to make. After strip cropping for two years, we admitted it was just a band-aid solution for our farm. Our land had no business being tilled. We finally made the right choice and seeded down all the cropland.

About that time, we toured New Zealand. What an education! Farmers there fatten lamb and beef, ship it thousands of miles, undersell us, and still make a profit. They accomplish this feat by producing high-quality forages through controlled grazing systems that depend on intense management, subdivided pastures and frequent stock moves.

Grain is too expensive there to feed it to livestock, yet their meat tastes superb. We were amused when a New Zealand woman asked us, "Don't you think grain-fed meat tastes, well funny?"

We came home inspired. We subdivided 40-acre pastures into 10-acre paddocks, and rotated stock about once a week. Not much happened.

Density Yields Diversity
We didn't give up. We knew controlled grazing worked because we had seen it in New Zealand. We took Stan Parsons' "Ranching For Profit" course and became familiar with the work of his former partner, Allan Savory. (See "Toolbox" in this issue for details on Parsons' new home-study course) These two men are largely responsible for bringing innovative range- and pasture-management ideas to North America.

In Africa, Savory and Parsons observed that wild grazing herbivores (unlike fenced farm animals) travel in large herds and stay close together because of predators. They also roam constantly because of the repugnance of their own wastes. As a result, forage is closely cropped, then has a chance to regrow before being grazed again.

If herbivores have clustered and migrated for millenia, then the forages they graze must be adapted to that behavior. To bring our deteriorating land closer to its natural prairie condition (short of bringing back predators), we had to start managing livestock to simulate the predators' effects.

So we subdivided more, cutting up pastures into 2- to 3-acre paddocks, and increased stock density by putting 30 to 40 cows
at a time on these smaller paddocks. To mimic migration, we moved them to new grass every day or two.

Because of these changes, our pastures are evolving into what we call "modern prairie"–a more diverse, stable and natural environment than found in traditionally managed pastures.

We've seen our pastures thicken with new plants, and found warm-season grasses (such as big bluestem) volunteering in what used to be solid tescue.

In a small cross section of our farm, we found more than 100 plant species, not including trees. We planted just four of those, and only a handful of the l00 aren't grazed at some growth stage by our cattle, sheep or guard donkey. Each plant species taps a unique array of nutrients, and provides a unique environment above and below the soil, allowing other creatures to thrive.

Increasing the biodiversity of our land is an important goal for us, because it is the foundation of our pasture productivity and stability. Biodiversity– coupled with efficient reproduction and value-added marketing leads us to more profit.

Flush When It's Lush
Just as we subdivided and increased stock density to imitate natural predator effects, we also use nature as a guide for our herd's genetic and reproductive management. Our breeding season matches the growing season. We don't feed grains to boost reproductive performance. Females are expected to breed during the spring burst of forage growth. If a cow isn't bred to calve between March 1 and April 30–for whatever reason–we sell her. She apparently isn't well-adapted to our environment and management.

  • Heifers weigh nearly two-thirds of their mature weight at breeding.
  • Cows have a body condition score of 5 at calving.
  • Cows are gaining weight two weeks before breeding.
  • Calves are removed for 48 hours breeding to stimulate estrus.
  • Calving season is 60 days.
  • Bulls are checked annually for fertility and libido.

We used to reason that the earlier calves are born, the higher their weaning weights. So our herd calved in January and

February. Cows were lactating and being bred while still on hay–a very costly practice.

It makes much more sense to match the breeding season–when a cow is at her peak nutritional demand –with the time when pasture nutrition is also at its peak. So now we flush the cows on our lushest grass in mid-May, and then turn in the bulls.

We used to accelerate estrus by separating calves from their mothers for 48 hours beginning the day the bulls are turned in. You can't buy a better, more natural estrus stimulant: But since most of our cows are already cycling by breeding time, we have discontinued this practice. Most years, about 75 percent of our cows conceive during their first estrus cycle and calve during the first 21 days of the calving season. Only a handful remain unbred after two cycles.

Cycling within such a tight period, the cows' nutritional needs rise and fall together, simplifying nutrition management. Calving chores are easier too. The days of checking, weighing and tagging newborn calves are concentrated into a short season. At weaning, the calves are nearly the same age, so there are no runts to get bossed around. And at marketing, a uniform group of calves is more valuable–as well as a beautiful sight to behold.


 How To Track Pasture Production

The vast majority of our forage production comes during just three months. The big challenge of livestock production is to ration out that spring and fall growth over the entire year. We use several planning tools to make the job easier.

Stan Parsons designed the grazing chart we use. (Contact: Ranch Management Consultants. 7719 Rio Grande Blvd. N.W., Albuquerque NM 87107, (505) 898-7417.) Along the left-hand side of the page we list the paddock identifications. Running horizontally from each paddock ID are 365 boxes representing the days of the year. Each day a paddock is grazed, we shade in the corresponding box. The chart shows us at a glance how long cattle grazed each paddock and how long it rested.

We record forage growth in each paddock using our grass budget chart. Every 10 days we take an enjoyable hike through all 63 paddocks. We rate each paddock on a scale of 1 to 10. Since this rating is purely subjective, the same person should score each time. My scale goes something like this:

  0 = Bare dirt.
  1 = 1 inch of forage.
  2 = 2 inches of forage.
  3 = 3 to 4 inches of forage.
  4 = Just right to graze if growth is fast.
  5 = Graze now.
  6 = Getting behind.
  7 = Too late to graze; make hay soon.
  8 = Make hay now.
  9 = Getting late.
10 = Oops. we're wasting feed!

We multiply each score times the number of acres in the paddock. We add the results to give a total forage score for the farm for that 10-day period.

Then we plot those totals on a forage growth graph. (See below.) Connecting the dots for each 10-day period gives us a trend line so we can see where we're headed. We can predict whether we'll have surplus forage and have to make hay, or whether we'll be short. By adding 10-day rainfall totals to the graph, we can easily see how our pastures respond to moisture.



Tracking forage production like this helps us make the right decisions for the stock. They respond with better weight gains and higher conception rates, and they stay healthier on a more natural diet. Because of the frequent moves, they associate us with fresh feed and are very docile. Put into a new paddock, cows graze like gluttons. Their mindful babies learn to do the same, and grow into aggressive grazers.
                                                                                                                                                                 —D.S.


Natural Lamb Adds Profits
Because we don't buy and sell our purebred livestock on the commercial market, we sacrifice some flexibility. We compensate with sheep and stocker calves that serve as a buffer against the peaks and valleys of forage growth. If forage is tight, we sell some stock. If we have a surplus, we buy more.

Sheep fit beautifully in a well-fenced cattle operation. Since only about 60 percent of their diet overlaps with cattle, pasture utilization improves. They can graze with cattle or apart.

Even though our farm is in prime coyote territory, we haven't had any attacks. Rotating paddocks helps prevent predators from knowing where and when to expect their prey. Electric fencing probably discourages them too. We have a Great pyrenees dog, but feel that our guard donkey might be adequate, alone. Since she grazes with the sheep, she's certainly less expensive to feed than the dog.

By managing our pastures better, we've reduced our feed costs and added stockers and sheep–increasing the livestock we carry by 50 percent on a weight basis. We've also increased our profits by not buying fertilizer and lime. (Why encourage more grass to grow until you can effectively use all that you've got?)

But the greatest contributor to our bottom line comes from adding value to what we produce. We made a great move when we switched from commercial cattle to registered Gelbvieh stock. Gelbvieh are very efficient producers, plus we receive a premium for seedstock.

A new endeavor that holds promise is direct marketing our lamb. Adding value by processing, packaging and delivering frozen lamb is more profitable than selling through normal markets. We sell everything from whole lambs to popular cuts. In a short time, we have expanded to include our own lean ground beef and shiitake mushrooms. We also market garlic braids, pork and eggs from other organic farmers.

Our selling strength is that our lamb is raised in a wholesome, natural environment, free from all the chemicals that city folks are concerned about. Having lived in both worlds, we can easily relate to our urban customers.

Another goal is to help make consumers more aware of where their food comes from and how it is raised. We believe consumers have the power to change agriculture with their shopping decisions, and we want to help them shape the future.

New Attitudes

Thinking about intensive grazing and nature as a model focused our attention on the land. We were struck by how much of the big picture we failed to see. Disturbing the soil–both physically and chemically–had taken its toll.

As our faith in conventional advice plummeted, we began to think for ourselves. For example, we developed a new attitude about "pests." We used to agonize over ragweed: It seemed to appear in all the intensively managed paddocks. But then we asked ourselves, was it taking over or just filling in bare spots? We came to realize its roots loosen the soil and its leaf litter catches water. It is a colonizing plant that prepares a seedbed for more desirable species. We also found that livestock eat ragweed when it's young and tender.

Nobody likes flies. But we started asking questions about them too. Are fly outbreaks caused by stock congregating in their own wastes too long? Do these pests provide any benefits, such as breaking down manure and speeding up nutrient cycling? What are the costs and benefits of a quick-fix fly killer? We decided flies aren't really the problem: They are just a symptom of poor management.

When we consider questions like these, we look to nature for answers. Nature teaches us tolerance, patience and a new perspective on problem solving. We now recognize what Native Americans always knew: We are just another strand in the web of life, supporting and supported by the rest of nature's creations.


Reproduced with permission of the publisher. The New Farm, May/June 1992, p. 14-20.

ABCs of Rotational Grazing: An SCS grazing specialist answers beginning

ITHACA, N.Y.–In Part 1, I helped you calculate how many paddocks and how much pasture you need to start rotational grazing. (See "ABCs Of Rotational Grazing," The New Farm, May/June '91.) I'm sure you've got other questions on your mind by now. Here are the ones I get asked most often:

What kind of fencing should I use? It's your choice. But whatever you use, I suggest building as many permanent paddocks as you think you'll need, based on the Steps outlined in Part I. I think permanent fencing actually adds to your flexibility, because then you can hook up polywire almost anywhere if you need to subdivide further. The secret is to have enough permanent subdivisions in the system so that you can't go wrong if your labor resources get stretched thin.

I'm wary of setting up systems that require you to move temporary fencing every time you move livestock. Moving wire is very labor-intensive. Some farmers enjoy it. But for many, the thrill wears off pretty fast. Some say it only takes them 20 minutes to move fence. It takes me 10 minutes just to get my boots on and get out the door.

When you're milking by yourself because your spouse is sick, the kids are getting hungry and there's a cold rain falling, you won't want to spend even 20 minutes moving fence. That's why I suggest designing your permanent fencing so all you have to do is open a gate before you go make supper.

What shape should my paddocks be? For best use of forage, the closer to square your paddock is, the better. Rectangles are OK as long as they are no more than four times longer than they are wide. With bigger rectangular paddocks, livestock will graze the gate ends more heavily than the far nooks and crannies. If you must build long paddocks, use polywire or other temporary fencing to break them up into shorter rectangles or squares.

How should I orient my paddocks on slopes?
Don't run rectangular paddocks up and down slopes with gates and water at the bottom. Livestock will graze half-way up the slope, then come back for water and start grazing again at the bottom. You 're up with overgrazing at the low end, and undergrazing at the far end. Whenever practical, make your paddocks along the contour, and run lanes up and down the slope.

Where should I put my gates?
Locate gates in the direction of the natural flow of the herd–usually at the end of the paddock closest to the barn. If you don't, when half the herd wakes up and sees the rest of the herd heading down the lane, they'll head for a gateless corner to catch up. They may never find their way out.

Where should I locate water?
The more accessible, the better. But you probably don't need waterers in every paddock. You can make one waterer serve two paddocks by locating it in the fenceline. Putting the waterer in the lane to serve several paddocks is OK. But the area is likely to get muddy, and manure will accumulate where it's not fertilizing your pastures.

Some farmers who are quite successful with rotational grazing only have water back at the barn. You run the risk that the livestock will come back for a drink and won't go back out to graze, and you're likely to suffer some production loss with high-producing animals. But if that's your only option, don't let it stop you from grazing. Compared to confinement feeding, you'll more than make up for any production losses with the cheap feed, and your cows will be in great shape.

How tall should the pasture be when I start grazing?
With most improved pastures consisting of grasses like brome, fescue, orchardgrass and timothy, as well as legumes like red clover, ladino clover and birdsfoot trefoil, I tell farmers to start grazing when the plants are about 8 to 10 inches tall. In early spring, you can start when they're about 4 to 6 inches tall. That saves you a few extra days of winter feed, plus it helps stagger pasture regrowth a little bit.

But don't be tempted to start too soon or you'll damage the pasture and it won't recover. I'd rather have the grass ahead of the cows than the cows ahead of the grass. Don't start grazing early in the same paddock every year. Rotate your "sacrifice area."

When should I move the livestock to new grass?
Some people will suggest you graze pastures right down to the dirt before moving cattle. I don't. With the improved forage species I mentioned above, leave at least 2 inches of stubble so that there is enough leaf area to ensure quick regrowth. It's about 2 inches from the tip of my middle finger to my knuckle. I simply stick my hand down through the grass to the ground to measure it.

If you don't leave 2 inches, those improved species won't bounce back quickly. Weeds and other less productive species will move in and take over. Also if you have livestock on too long, they have to work too hard to get enough dry matter. With high-producing animals, like milk cows, production will drop if you don't move them before the grass gets too short.

There's one exception to the 2-inch rule of thumb. You can't graze blue-grass/white clover pastures too close to damage them. Grazing that kind of pasture down to 1 inch helps maintain the white clover in the stand. Still, you have to move the livestock when those species get too short for the animals to graze efficiently. You can also start grazing bluegrass/white clover when it's about 4 to 6 inches tall.

Will I need to clip my pastures?
Clipping pastures can be a real waste of time, money and effort–especially if done for no better reason than to make the pasture look pretty. You should clip pastures when you have a problem, but not just to even up the grass. Harvest as much as you can with your livestock, first. Then mechanically harvest the surplus to be fed during the winter. If some of your paddocks still get away from you, then by all means, clip them. But as you fine-tune your management, you should find you have to clip less often.

How about shade?
Many dairy farmers are so concerned about shade that they refuse to put cows on pasture without it. The truth is, in the Northeast there are but a handful of days in a normal summer when lack of shade should be a concern. When heat is a problem, dairy cows can be turned out early in the morning or late in the evening to avoid heat. Shade isn't a necessity–good management is.

What about dragging?
With continuous grazing, dragging is almost a necessity. But once you get a good rotational system down, you probably won't need to drag very much. Like clipping, you may even be able to eliminate it completely. You'll find that the livestock will distribute manure more evenly, and that the manure will break up and disappear faster. You may still need to drag near waterers and loafing areas.

How do I balance rations when my animals are grazing?
That's a good question. But even if you don't balance your milk cow's ration exactly right, you're still going to end up making cheaper milk.

Ed Rayburn, grasslands specialist at Seneca Trails RC&D in Franklinville, N.Y., is developing a computer program to answer that tough question. It's part of a three-year project funded by the federal LISA research program, and should be released in late '91 or early '92. (Look. for a review in an upcoming issue of The New Farm.)

Ration balancing is important, says Rayburn, because you can loose a pound of milk for every pound of grain you don't feed that your milk cows need. But he's encouraged, because the principles of ration balancing on pasture are the same as barn feeding. He offers the following guidelines:

  • Make sure 20 to 50 percent of your pasture is legume to increase forage intake.
      
  • Make sure cows have enough forage when you turn them in-8 to 10 inches of improved grasses and legumes or 4 to 6 inches of bluegrass/white clover.
      
  • Start balancing your ration with a good carbohydrate source–shell corn, ear corn, barley or oats in moderation. Adequate carbohydrates are needed to make the best use of degradable protein in pasture forage.
      
  • With Holsteins averaging 60 to 70 pounds or more of milk per day, bypass protein becomes the limiting factor. In the 60- to 70-pound range, adding distillers grain should be sufficient. Above 70 pounds, add roasted or extruded soybeans (also a good source of oils and amino acids) or animal products.
      
  • Don't overfeed grain, or fiber intake levels will be too low. Too much protein can also reduce milk production.

I've done everything you suggested, and I'm still not getting the production you promised. What should I do?
First, you can live with pastures that aren't very productive even under intensive management by either cutting down the number of animals you're grazing or by increasing your pasture acreage. Chances are good those pastures are still more profitable than raising corn silage.

The next troubleshooting step is to take a good, hard look at your soil test. Ideally, you should test your soil before you set up your pasture system. But with the low priority most pastures have gotten in the past, soil testing usually comes as an afterthought.

Even if you do test your soil first, don't run out and order enough fertilizer and lime to grow 10-ton alfalfa. Most intensive grazing systems do just fine at moderate pH and fertility levels. If your soil is very acidic, lime to bring the pH up to about 6.0. Bring P and K levels up to the medium to high range suggested by your land grant university for grass/legume hay at yield goals appropriate for your fields.

Should I reseed my pasture?
If production is still less than you want after correcting any fertility problems, consider changing your pasture species. From my experience, this should be a last resort. But for years, it's been the first solution people think of. The typical scenario is this: Your pasture wears out. So you seed in some legumes or grasses, and maybe put on some fertilizer. Then you go on grazing it continuously and the new species disappear again.

You've got to change your management first. When mismanaged, grazing animals are nothing more than destructive pasture predators that can eat themselves out of house and home. Until you control your animals, reseeding is a waste of time and money. Only after you have established the grazing system, soil tested and fertilized should you even think about reseeding a pasture.

Chances are good that well-adapted forage species are right there waiting for you. At the Cornell Hillside Pasture Research Project, we cleared brush from an abandoned pasture one spring, and grazed it hard all summer. There was some pretty good orchardgrass coming in all by itself. But we no-till seeded the pasture with brome and birdsfoot trefoil in August. It took really well. After a couple of years, however, the brome and trefoil were gone, and–you guessed it –we had a great stand of orchardgrass. Live and learn.

If you do reseed, don't plow up your pasture. Frost-seed or drill new species into the existing sod. If you really did pick species that are better for your soils and management than the ones that are already there, the new ones will take over.

If you're really determined to do some seeding, don't look at your pastures. Look at some of your worn-out alfalfa fields. With a little fencing and seed, you could probably turn them into great pastures.

Or better yet, look at that corn field next to the barn, it's probably got great fertility from all the manure that's been spread there. Seed it down. Without corn, you won't have to spray so close to the house anymore. And the cows will be grazing right there where you can keep an eye on them.

"But Darrell, that's corn ground," you say. Sure. When that corn is 7 feet tall, it looks like a lot of feed. But it's in rows 3 feet apart and only grows a short time during the year. Pasture covers every inch of that soil and is green and growing eight months out of 12.

Unless you're getting 16 tons of silage off that field, you're losing money. In my mind, that's not corn ground. That's pasture ground. Plant it to pasture and develop a good grazing system and you'll get 5 tons of the cheapest high-quality feed you've ever raised, instead of losing money. Break out of that corn mindset. It may be the best move you ever made.

Editor's Note: Darrell L. Emmick is state grasslands specialist for the Soil Conservation Service in New York. Part I of this feature appeared in the May/ June '91 issue of The New Farm.


Reproduced with permission of the publisher. The New Farm, July/August 1991, p. 26-28.

Put Water Where You Want It: A mobile tank increases your pasture-management options

By Craig Cramer


NEW HAMPTON, Iowa–For less than $900, Mike Reicherts built a mobile waterer and mineral feeder for his 72 stockers. "I wanted a simple, portable system that can handle a lot of animals without having to refill it very often," he says. "You can't buy one. So I built one myself."

Reicherts views the low-cost tool as a temporary solution for getting water to all his paddocks. "Our grazing system is still in transition," he explains. "I don't want to bury water pipe until I know where I want everything to go."

The foundation of Reicherts' waterer is an old running gear (probably worth less than $50, he says) and a 1,200-gallon polytank (about $400 new, but considerably less at farm sales). The tank and gear are actually on loan from neighbor, and fellow grazier Tom Frantzen, who used them to fill remote stock tanks before installing his own permanent below-ground water system.

Reicherts bent 4 by 8-foot sheets of galvanized sheet metal to form the bottom and long sides of the troughs. Then he welded on the ends and reinforced the top edges with scrap, three-fourths-inch pipe. He estimates materials cost about $100 per trough. The gravity-fed water reaches each trough through plastic tubing connected to l-inch KGS Midi Flow valves. (Cost: About $35 each. Kentucky Graziers Supply, 1929 South Main St., Paris KY 40361, (800) 729-0592.)

Reicherts fashioned an angle-iron bracket to carry a Pride of the Farm three-compartment mineral feeder. (Feeder cost: About

$100. Hawkeye Steel Products Inc., P.0. Box 2000, Houghton IA 52631, (800) 553-1791.) He fills each compartment with a different mix–One high in calcium, one high in phosphorus and one high in magnesium–and lets the stockers balance their own mineral intake. The feeder is the most weatherproof one he could find, and cattle quickly learn how to use it, he adds.

Rather than hauling the waterer back to the farmstead, Reicherts recharges it from a 500-gallon nurse tank–usually just every other day, but daily during hot weather. He places the waterer where he wants to concentrate manure and hoof action. For example, if I have a thistle infestation, I'll park it right there. High animal impact increases plant diversity, and hopefully will push succession forward to more desirable species," he explains.

Even after he installs a permanent water system, Reicherts or his neighbor will keep the portable one handy for times when they move animals to remote fields. "This is one of those tools that increases our flexibility and gives us more options," says Reicherts.


Reproduced with permission of the publisher. The New Farm, May/June 1994, p. 55.

Pasture Proving Ground: This grazier puts tools and techniques to the test

Greg Bowman

HONEY GROVE, Pa.–Ed Rits rotated pastures when he was a dairyman, but he didn't see the potential of intensively managed grass until he switched to raising beef cattle in '87. He's been sharpening his grazing skills and product expertise ever since.

By developing his 100-acre farm around its 59 acres of pastured slopes and valleys, Rits has cut yearly inputs by $51,000 and slashed labor by 6,300 hours per year. He's also increased income by 50 percent. Debt-free since '88, he's financed all improvements with profit from his 25-cow Holstein x Hereford herd.

In the process, he's picked the brains of many recognized grazing experts and heard pitches for lots of products. He doubts any claim until he proves it right or wrong.

"Grazing is new for a lot of people, and there's some 'snake oil' being promoted. I want to help farmers get started with grazing, to keep their costs low and help them understand how grazing can work on their land," says Rits.

Family health problems forced him out of dairying. Service as a district conservationist with the USDA's Soil Conservation Service got him thinking about whole-farm resource management. It also put him in contact with grazing advocate Tom Calvert, an SCS conservation agronomist based in Somerset, Pa. When Rits realized he could profit from his land without struggling to produce crops in his flinty soil, he was ready to start farming again.

LEARNING FROM GRASS
"For years, I'd been moving my dairy cows through 35 acres of pasture divided into five lots," says Rits. "But I hadn't been managing the land resource. I'd keep them on a lot until the grass was too short, then turn them onto one that was too old. I couldn't understand why the cows didn't seem happy there. Sometimes, by coincidence, I'd get them on a lot with just a little regrowth and they loved it. But I wasn't meeting the needs of the grass and the animals together."

Rits follows one of Calvert's fundamental recommendations: Start with what you've got. In the farmer-to-farmer consulting work Rits began in '92, he emphasizes these points to new graziers:

  • Know your soils. "I was trained as a soils man, and that's where I started looking when I made the change," says Rits. Poorly drained soils need special management–especially in animal pressure and in what species you encourage through grazing or planting, he says.
      
  • Focus on feed value. Figure out how your farm can produce the maximum nutrition for livestock. "Sure, 180-bushel corn can produce up to 40 tons of corn silage, but it's not the highest quality feed. That same ground in alfalfa at 25 percent protein will give you a lot more feed value."
       
  • Watch before you plant. Find out what is growing naturally in your pastures, and graze it for several seasons. Observe how well it meets the nutritional needs of your livestock, and how it responds to intensive management. I waited five years before I planted my first new species. I knew by then that I needed a high-protein crop in fall to finish calves, and MATUA brome looked as if it would work." (See side-bar, "Starting MATUA.")
              
  • Maintain pasture fertility. Rits composts purchased chicken litter and solid cattle manure from his barnyard with straw and sawdust. He windrows the mixture in early summer, lets it stand without turning until fall, then spreads the finished material on pastures before the soil freezes.
        Compost encourages earthworms, which in turn break down dung pats. Rits says it took him five years of intensive grazing and several applications of compost to build up earthworm populations in his paddocks to their current robust levels. "Earthworms take care of dung pats in five days, reducing those green spots of regrowth that cattle reject."
         
  • Provide water. Rits started out with a traditional round concrete trough recommended by SCS for spring improvement projects" He had the traditional problems, too: cattle loafing around a heavily manured, muddy, tromped-down area. The spring still serves the herd in winter, and provides water in summer for the 32 paddocks closest to the barn. A pressurized water system now supplies 52 paddocks that are more remote or across the road. Rits uses surface lines with quick couplers to supply garden hoses that attach to mini-tanks. (See "No Tipping, No Waiting" ) He routes the hoses under fences and through culverts in waterways.
       
  • Ask lots of questions. Rits says beginning graziers should go slow, do their homework, and try to work with other farmers. "I've found The New Farm, Stockman Grass Farmer, and on-farm examples to be the best sources of information," he says. "Don't think you have to rush out to an expensive grazing conference with speakers from far away," he says. "Start by talking to graziers in your area, then in your state. You'll get a lot more from the 'big names' when you've got some of your own experience."
         
  • Study before you buy. While the profit in grazing comes from what you don't spend on tillage and harvesting, Rits says it pays to ponder what you will spend on hardware purchases long before you're ready to pound posts. Most of his local farm-supply stores don't stock suitable fencing hardware for intensive rotational grazing, and buying the right mail-order products can be challenging for the novice. "If you're not going to work with a consultant who's familiar with the market, plan to spend two years looking and reading," says Rits.
        He's learned a lot over the phone from fence-product suppliers, and says many grazing specialists in Extension and SCS are helpful. He sways it's not fair to try to milk product information from fencing–installation contractors. "Tell them up front you're looking for information. Don't occupy their time unless you plan to use their services."

START AT HOME
A paddock by Rits' house serves as his "making do" demonstration. There he has soft metal wire, metal posts and white ceramic doughnuts still in use–with old woven wire in place from years ago. The high visibility of the woven wire, set outside the remaining wooden posts, helps young calves realize there's a barrier. A single strand of electrified polywire convinces them and trains them for life. Rits also is quick to point out the limits of old fencing materials. Ceramic insulators on a wire loop don't work when polywire comes within a half-inch of the loop, and black rubber milker hoses are too soft to insulate loop of fence even on a dry day.

Think through each step of your pasture management and livestock movement before you position your first fence, he tells new graziers. There are lots of ways to hold up wire, but how often you plan to move a fence – and whether the posts need to bend – determines whether the cheapest post is the best value.

Rits has salvaged material for no-cost posts from area manufacturers. One batch was preservative-treated wood left over from construction at the local feed mill. "They were kind of bulky to handle in the field," he admits, "but I had nothing invested except the time to saw them to length." He used them in a permanent fence.

Where post flexibility isn't the issue, steel rods and rigid plastic pipes can work well, says Rits, as long as the necessary clip or insulator material keeps the total expense reasonable.

To show the cost range of posts he has tried for movable fence, Rits has a permanent display near his farmstead. Some are carefully designed commercial models. Others are adapted from inexpensive materials that were available close to home. For his annual grazing field day, he attaches price cards to the more than 20 post/insulator combinations and describes they've worked and weathered in the field.

His lowest-cost combination is a free post of stiff plastic pipe, outfitted with a cotter pin to hold the polywire. Not counting the labor to drill a hole, his material cost totaled 2 cents. At the top end is a long-life fiberglass post, fully bendable, with a slide-on plastic wire clip that allows the grazier – but not his animals – to slip out the wire. Cost to Rits for this combination of Spider system components was $1.77: $1.36 for the post, 41 cents for the clip.

He says the relatively pricey Spider combination earns its way in some locations on his farm because it is nearly deer-proof. "I installed my Spider posts after deer tore out in one night the polywire on rigid posts I had spent three days erecting, " he says.

Spider posts are flexible and the double-wedge clips allow wire to slide freely. He can step on the wire and hold it to the ground to cross it. When deer walk into the fence, they can't avoid contact and don't dislodge the electric barrier. "You have to learn where you can make do, and where it pays to go with a system that really works," says Rits.

The unique Spider G-spring gatepost attachments also win his favor. The insulated arced handles on wire ends carry current into post plugs, but allow removal of wires for passage. Because disconnection releases a wire's tension, Rits carefully sites a second post near the opening. The catch post allows him to maintain electrical current and tension while he moves cattle.

"Economy" fiberglass posts – his cost 50 cents each – tend to splinter more quickly in response to weathering Rits notes. He uses them for fence he doesn't plan to move. For posts that he plans to handle repeatedly or that have to flex, he selects more expensive types with a glossy, smooth coating that holds up well for several years.

 STARTING MATUA

AFTER FOUR YEARS of carefully watching his pastures evolve, beef producer Ed Hits decided he had an ecological niche for a prairie-type grass that would surge during fall on his south-central Pennsylvania farm. His native cool-season species recover in autumn from their long rest periods of summer, but don't reach their spring productivity.
    A '92 planting of reed canarygrass didn't thrive, so in '93 he turned to MATUA brome, a New Zealand import. Its high production potential made the management needed for its establishment seem worthwhile, he says.
He plowed and disked the well-drained field April 30. He planted 25 pounds of seed per acre (at a seed cost of $1.58 per pound) with a Brillion planter, followed by a spring-tooth harrow to incorporate the seed just below the surface. Soil moisture was optimum. The MATUA germinated in 21 days, but had lots of competition from broadleaf weeds and foxtail by July 6. He mowed the stand to 4 inches and baled the hay.
   On July 13 he sprayed with a half-pint of 2,4-D and a half-pint of Banvel per acre to suppress weeds and give the MATUA a competitive advantage. He also spread urea to provide 50 pounds of N per acre. He cut and baled again in August, October and November, finding no broadleaves and only a little foxtail.
    For cues on MATUA management, Rits relies on forage specialist Dr. Gerald A. Jung at the USDA-ARS Pasture Lab, State College, Pa. "What's critical is harvesting after the 45-day period allowed for seedfall from August 15 to September 30," says Rits, citing Jung's research. "Even after seedfall you have good forage. Harvest really lets the sunlight penetrate to the soil and helps the seed germinate and thicken the stand."
   Jung says MATUA is like birdsfoot trefoil in its palatability at maturity. Unlike trefoil, MATUA grass can't be stockpiled. Leaving the grass tall over winter can cause it die out in cool climates, says Rits.
  This year, he hopes the MATUA will lessen his dependence on other grasses and legumes in the September-to- November period, allowing him to lengthen rest periods and stockpile the more durable forages for winter. Also, he needs the strong feed value of the imported brome species to help finish stocker calves since he moved up his weaning by a month to September 1. He reasons that the calves will gain weight sooner if they get used to an all-forage diet, and believes the cows can use the extra month of grazing to put on body condition for winter.
    He plans to fence the field so cows graze MATUA this fall.                                                                        – G.B.

ALFALFA COMES THROUGH
Rits' September 1 grazing field day will be a good time to see how successful his alfalfa and MATUA plantings were in extending the rest periods for his grass/clover pastures.

"Alfalfa's a drought-saver on my flinty soils," says Ritz. He tries to harvest it about 33 days into its regrowth cycle rather than watch its height, which depends on moisture levels. In order to protect his pasture sward from overgrazing and to stockpile some grass
for winter in-field feeding, he feeds hay in August or September during dry periods. Rits pays special attention to balancing the needs of the legume and of his cattle around each fall's first killing frost. "I've had as much problem with bloat on frosted alfalfa as I have from grazing it wet. I make sure the cattle eat dry hay in the morning and then turn them on about noon," says Rits. His cattle pick out the grass first, then get to the defrosted alfalfa. He lets the cattle graze the alfalfa down to about 4 inches tall.

TROUGH TIME EVENS WATER TEMP
Rits' cattle told him last summer that white plastic pipe didn't entice them to drink more water, despite claims that the bright pipe keeps water cooler. He says graziers in the South, where days are longer and summers are hotter, may get more benefit than he did. Promoters say because white pipe reflects sunlight, it provides cooler water than does black plastic pipe. Rits tested water temperature coming out the ends of the pipes–where the "white" water was indeed cooler–and in the tank, where water from either color pipe soon measured about 10 degrees less than air temperature.

The important figure, however, was how much water the cattle drank during hot periods from each supply source. Rits compared water consumption by a group of cow-calf pairs during two six-day periods when daytime highs exceeded 95 F. The cattle were on the same paddock during these periods.

The group drank within a gallon of the same amount during each/period, Rits' records show. Further, he's observed that in areas where cattle don't graze, grass usually falls over above ground lines after several months, providing an insulating shade layer. In the six-day periods, his cattle drank 93 percent of their water during the day, 7 percent at night. Pipe color matters for another reason in colder climates. Rits knows one Ontario farmer who says he uses heat- absorbing black pipe because freezing is more of a problem than is overly warm water.

No Tipping, No Waiting
JUST GETTING COOL, clean water to each pasture is not enough. If cattle drink faster than a tub can refill, they can find ways to amuse themselves with dangling float valves and with empty troughs that they can roll with the toss of a bovine head. Producers usually are less amused.
"I want cattle to be grazing, walking to get a drink, or walking right back to eat more grass," says beef grazier Ed Rits. "There's no gain while they're waiting on water."
Low-volume systems can work adequately when cows drink one at a time. "But my cows always seem to drink in threes," says Rits. He is testing component combinations this summer to find a reasonably priced system that can supply water for three mature cattle drinking simultaneously, each consuming about 5 gallons of water in about 2 minutes. That's a typical situation for his herd– one that taxes most movable in-paddock water systems he's tried.
"Many float valves won't let enough water in, and 25- gallon tanks that hold only 17 gallons cause trouble," says Rits. "If a tank gets nearly empty, cattle will tip it over trying to get more water."
He's put together two prototypes that do better. Rits selected a 30-gallon polyethylene tank newly designed for pasture watering by Sentry Inc., a division of Agri- Engineering Inc. It holds 23 gallons, leaving him an 8-gallon cushion after the 15-gallon drawdown–even if no new water flowed in. The 14-pound tank has almost straight sides, making it nearly tip-proof by cattle.
With slow-drinking (or unusually docile) animals, a 2.5- ga1lons-per-minute valve might suffice. But Rits wants a surer thing, so he outfitted a tank with a 10-gpm valve. Price for the high-volume valve and tank is about $70, only $10 more than for Sentry's 3-gpm valve/tank set. He also uses a Philmac valve, from Rife Hydraulics that provides about 7.5 gpm at his 40-psi line pressure–less in the more distant paddocks where pressure is lower. An oversized, 6-inch float is big enough that cows can't get into their mouths. Rits also uses Rife's 30-gallon tank that is factory-modified to accept the valve. (The tank assembly–complete with quick-disconnect fittings–sells for less than $200.)
He'll have several other components in his pastures this summer. Tanks include: a 55-gallon commercial food transport barrel cut down to 30-gallon capacity; a white 25-gallon tank from Kentucky Graziers Supply; and a black plastic 35-gallon tank from New Zealand.
Valves in his pastures this summer include:






    http://www.awionline.org/www.awionline.org/farm/diambk1.gif);">
  • Dare float valve. "Slow, but dependable for young heifers who can drink in groups, or for single cows."
  • An upright universal Job valve from python that is situated in the center of a tank. Rits occasionally has to jiggle the valve's pin to keep water flowing.
  • A bottom-entry Job valve activated by a string and float. "This float system works very well. My cattle like to play with some of the other string systems."
  • Kentucky Graziers Supply float valve. After Rits reported to KGS that water came out through a small opening within the valve, he received an improved version that works fine. But he says the float valve nut can still come loose, leaving the mechanism vulnerable to cow damage.
  • Hudson full-flow valve with a diaphragm for quick start and shut-off. He'll outfit this valve in a cut-down $5 plastic barrel with $10 of plumbing supplies and $10 in labor.


THE TRIALS OF SUMMER
With the chores of last winter behind him, Rits is happy to be back to managing pasture and this summer's crop of observations from his ongoing product evaluations. He's experimenting to make a better-quality compost, and to compare the value of compost versus fresh manure for fertilizing orchardgrass hay.

Rits wants farmers to more actively help each other innovate, adapt and prosper with sustainable methods. "Unless you meet with others who are going the same direction, you lose enthusiasm, because you think you're the only one doing it." He sees on-farm research at his Tuscorora Mountain Acres as one way to strengthen the pool of existing knowledge farmers can share.

Editor's Note: You can contact Ed Hits at RR1 Box 87, Honey Grove PA 17035, (717) 734-3745.


Reproduced with permission of the publisher. The New Farm, May/June 1994, p. 19-20, 22, 24-25.

Profitable Poultry on Pasture

Broilers and layers follow beef cattle in this rotation
Michael Traupman

SWOOPE, Va.–Joel Salatin's pastures are for the birds. Ninety-five of his 550 acres are devoted largely to ranging chickens that help him net about $25,000 working only six months a year. Last year, Salatin produced more than 6,000 broilers and 3,000 dozen eggs–with pasture as the main feed source.

Joel Salatin moves his broilers to new pasture simply by pulling their crates into fresh grass:
[Click on picture icon to view, and use your browser back button to come back to text]

"Consumption of grain decreases as consumption of grass increases. It all keeps the expense side of production down," says Salatin. " A chicken will only consume so much grass. After all, a chicken is not a cow. But....the freshness of the forage has everything to do with consumption. When we move them, they will eat more forage and more bugs and less grains." Pasturing has cut Salatin's feed expenses up to an estimated 60 percent on layers and 30 percent on broilers. Also, the broilers reach market weight two weeks earlier than normal.

While Salatin knows that his chickens prefer to graze on pastures with a legume, preferably clover, he is convinced that they do so well on pasture because they are moved often and are constantly getting fresh grass and manure to graze over. "The key is extremely frequent freshness. Animals have to have their beds changed–their linens cleaned and beds cleaned just like people. They eat much more if they, just like you and I, get fresh food and drink," he says.

Beef-Poultry Rotation
On Salatin's Polyface Farm, 50 head of beef graze pasture first. Controlled by portable electric fences, the cattle leave a trail of manure and 4 to 5 inches of grass stubble in their wake.

"The cows have to graze ahead... and get the forage down to poultry levels" Salatin explains. Chickens are attracted to the lush regrowth stimulated by the grazing cattle. "One to 2 inches of grass residue is ideal. Four to 5 inches works fine, but 6 to 7 inches is difficult. Long grass also isn't as clean. The broilers mash it over and their manure will not make contact with the soil surface."

Four days after the cattle chow down on the grass, the chickens are put on that pasture to clean up after them. Salatin says both his layers and broilers love to pick through fresh manure for insects, including emerging fly maggots, and undigested food particles, both helpful sources of protein. "The chickens sanitize the field, eating the parasites," adds Salatin.

Chickens pasture a field only once in two years. After pasture is grazed by the chickens, hay is cut twice and stored for cattle feed in winter. Salatin now has nearly four years' worth of hay in storage.

Pasturing In Pens
The American layer breeds are extremely aggressive. .'They scratch. .. and move. They'll graze all year and they'll go out in all kinds of weather. About the only thing that keeps them in the house is snow," Salatin says.

In contrast, he says, "The broilers... are very lethargic. They are bred like a race car to eat a lot of feed and gain a lot of weight really fast. For them, the free-range concept doesn't work. They don't free-range. They stay around the feeder. You have to force them onto the pasture so they range. "

The dissimilar grazing characteristics of the birds force Salatin to use two very different kinds of portable houses.

Cornish cross broilers spend all of their time in 10- x 12-foot pens that Salatin moves daily. Each wooden and aluminum pen is 2 feet high and holds 100 birds. One end of each pen is enclosed with an aluminum sheet and is always faced west into prevailing winds to minimize health problems in cold, wet weather. The other sides are wrapped in poultry netting to provide plenty of fresh air and sunlight. Salatin only raises broilers from April 1 to Oct.1.

Pens include a removable feed trough and gravity-fed waterer. To save time, Salatin stores a pre-mixed ration of ground corn, soybean meal, meat and bone meal with a probiotic in old fuel tanks in the field. He places the pens in a V-shaped pattern. "By running the pens with a V formation, I don't have to keep access clear," he adds. "I don't need to make room for feeding and watering."

On one acre, Salatin is able to graze roughly 500 birds. He raises seven batches of broilers per season. Salatin moves the birds to fresh pasture every morning by sliding a 2-wheeled dolly under the pen and pulling it only a few feet. The chickens merely have to walk with the pen. "It only takes 1.5 minutes to move them and 1.5 to service," says Salatin.

A Rolling Henhouse
Free-ranging layers venture up to 30 yards from their portable pens, which Salatin calls eggmobiles. "The eggmobile would be worth it even if they didn't lay eggs," Salatin adds. "The beauty of this is, because the house is just a bed for them– the lunch counter and gymnasium are outside –you can cram them in pretty well in that house. They sleep in there. That's all they do. At night when they sleep, I don't even think half the floor is covered."

[Click on picture icon to view Salatin's eggmobile, and use your browser back button to come back to text]

An eggmobile is simply a portable 12- x 20-foot wooden henhouse that holds 230 birds humanely. It has a lean- to roof that slants from 6 feet to 2 feet in height. The floor is wire mesh in summer and hay-covered plywood in the winter. Although there is a big door on each end, Salatin says you don't have to walk inside to care for the chickens or gather eggs. Laying boxes built around sides can easily be opened from the outside for egg removal.

More Grass, Less Grain
Salatin says he began to save money on grain when he realized his hens were not consuming the grain he was putting out. "I was mixing feed here and putting it in the eggmobile. Yet they were pretty much keeping off the grain. I thought maybe the recipe was off," he recalls. "So, I thought I'd let them tell me what they wanted."

Salatin arranged the feed in separate feed boxes, delivering it to the chickens cafeteria-style with a container each for wheat, barley and bone meal. The chickens made a clear choice. "Basically they were eating whole corn," says Salatin. "They eat only what they want. They get their protein from the grass, especially in the summer. What they need are carbohydrates. And those are the calories they get entirely in corn."

Salatin says he doesn't mind substituting inexpensive corn for much more costly feed, since the chickens are getting their necessary nutrients from the field. "Protein is expensive. Corn is relatively cheap. They are consuming the cheap part of the feed-seven cents a pound compared to 11 to 12 cents a pound."

In the summer months especially, his layers consume only seven pounds of feed per 100 chickens per day, costing roughly 77 cents per 100 birds. On other farms, Salatin says confined chickens will consume up to 30 pounds per 100 per day, for a cost of $2.10 per 100 birds. "That's significant savings," he adds.

Using a system he loosely modeled after Booker T. Whatley's Clientele Membership Club, Salatin sells roughly 6,000 broilers a year at $1.20 per pound, live weight, to more than 300 families each year. The average bird weighs about 4 to 4.6 pounds. Having slightly more than $2 in expenses for each bird, Salatin nets $2.80 a bird.


Reproduced with permission of the publisher. The New Farm, May/June 1990, p. 20, 23.

Voters Reject Factory Farms

AWI Quarterly Fall/Winter1998-1999: Farm Animals


VotersReject Factory Farms
Anti-Factory FarmCandidates Win, Struggle Against Factory Farms Continues

by Tom Garrett

In 1998, the proliferation of hog factories, which has embroiledstate legislatures and county commissions for much of the decade,reached center stage as a national issue. On November 3, in thewords of the Wall Street Journal's Bruce Ingersoll, "Pigpolitics became big politics."

In the two states where the hog factory came directly beforethe people, the verdict was unequivocal. In Colorado, Initiative14, which places hog factories under moderately severe regulation,was approved by over 60% of the electorate. South Dakota AmendmentE, which bans corporate farming in the state altogether, gained59% of the popular vote despite a massive infusion of corporatecash and opposition from the state's Republican governor.

Lauch Faircloth was defeated by JohnEdwards (D, NC). Faircloth, according to CounterPunch (November1-15, 1998) "was part owner of Coharie Farms, the 30th largesthog producer in the country. Faircloth owned more than $1 millionworth of stock in two slaughterhouses. In Congress he attendedto the interests of the pig men as chairman of the Senate Subcommitteeon Clean Water, Wetlands, Private Property and Nuclear Safety."Environmentalists and small farmers across the state worked hardto defeat Faircloth. The Sierra Club flooded the airwaves withads linking Faircloth to water pollution and pfiesteria.

   
 Progress or Retrogression? Above Left: A relaxed group of pigs photographed on a family farm, almost a hundred years ago. Above right: Sows in a present-day factory farm. They can't even turn around in their 22-inch-wide gestation stalls. They express their desperation by attacking the bars that imprison them.

In Iowa, where hog factories haveblighted northern counties and driven most of Iowa's traditionalhog farmers out of business, the hog issue played heavily in DemocratTom Vilsack's crushing upset of Republican gubernatorial candidateJim Lightfoot. In neighboring Minnesota, Reform Party candidate,Jessie "The Mind" Ventura's victory sent a seismic shockthrough the American political establishment. The governor-electsupports a temporary moratorium on new hog factories.

Factory farming was also a factorin the unexpectedly severe defeat of anti-environmentalist Republicancandidate Ellen Sauerbrey by Maryland's incumbent governor, ParrisGlendening. Glendening received high marks for his crackdown onMaryland's huge chicken farms following the 1997 pfiesteria outbreakin the Chesapeake Bay area. Environmental protection was a definingissue in the campaign.

Despite political setbacks, the industryblitzkrieg shows no sign of abating. With the producer price ofhogs as Iowa as 9 cents a pound – the same price it was inthe Depression Era – the last of America's family hog farmersare being driven from the business, while corporations are engagedin a brutal battle for control of the hog market. In the meantime,thousands of citizens, from the New Melloray Monastery in Iowato Owyhee County, Idaho, are threatened by the insensate drivefor more, and still more, hog factories.


FIGHTING THE 'NEW FEUDAL RULERS'

Excerpts from the January 3, 1999
Washington Post
article by William Clairborne

"It's ironic when you think about our heritage in South Dakota, "said Johnson, 41, who took over the family farm when his father had a stroke in 1981. "'Our ancestors left the landlords and kings in Europe to come here for their economic freedom, and now we're making the big corporations the new feudal rulers ... Sometimes I think nobody is paying attention while the big corporations are just taking over the whole farm economy and destroying an American way of life. " [Charlie Johnson a farmer from Madison, South Dakota]

The article quotes another farmer:

"The feed comes from out of state, the hogs come from out of state and the hogs are shipped out of state for slaughter, " said Don Hoogestraat, who turned his third-generation family farm over to his son eight years ago. "That leaves us with nothing but the manure, and the farmer becomes a hired hand on his own farm. "

Hoogestmat, a former president of the South Dakota Pork Producers Council who is now critical of the council support of corporate-backed farming, accused big hog-producers of engaging in "planned overproduction" to temporarily drive pork prices down and force more family farms into contract feeding agreements. Earlier this month the price of hogs dropped to a 27-year low of 15 cents a pound in Sioux Falls – half of what it costs to produce – and in some parts of the country prices have dropped to less than 10 cents a pound.

US Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman has announced a series of crisis measures, including a moratorium on government loans for new pork production plants. 


Animalsas Units of Production:
Industrial Agribusinessand Sentient Beings

By Ken Midkiff


Traditional farming operationstreated animals as individuals. A farmer knew the personalitiesof his milk cows as well as he did those of neighboring farmers.I knew which of my sows liked to have her back and ears scratched– and which one would try to viciously bite if I approached.When ewes rejected their lambs, we brought them into the houseand fed them from a bottle. As a small child, I knew which ofthe old roosters would attack me (some roosters are just damnedmean) and which could be carried around in my red wagon.

Somewhere between my childhood inthe 1940s and the 1970s, something went terribly wrong in foodproduction. Schools of agriculture and the USDA, taking theirmarching orders from agribusiness implement and chemical companiesstarted preaching the adoption of the Industrial Model. Get bigor get out. Volume of production is more important than quality.

A diversified, sustainable systemof integrated crops and animal production was abandoned in favorof monocultures. Farmers became specialists. Some grew only cornand soy beans. Others developed huge dairy or beef feedlot operations.This move had nothing at all to do with needing to feed the world,and everything to do with concentration of food production, andprofits, into the hands of a few large corporations. Market controlwas the goal. Not many more hogs or chickens are being grown todaythan in the past – only the methods have changed.

Poultry was the first to totallyconvert to the industrial model. Today there are almost no independentpoultry growers, all are either owned by or under contract withlarge corporations. The hog industry is going the same direction.

So what? Well, animals are now raisedin huge confinement structures, crammed in small pens or cages,given antibiotics to combat diseases (that can run rampant insuch stressful conditions). One conveyor brings in food, anothersystem transports out excrement. From a rather idyllic existenceon the family farm to a unit of production, packed in with thousandsof other units of production, animals are now treated as onlya product – much as any other industrial product. Just widgets.

Chickens raised for broilers for massconsumption are now grown in confinement structures that containup to 22,000 birds. Hatching to slaughter is only eight weeks.Those drumsticks at Kentucky Fried Chicken are from a two-monthold chicken. The methods of production are nasty, brutish, andshort.

Hogs are raised in arguably worseconditions. Mortality rates are very high. Sows in gestation stallsand farrowing crates cannot turn around. In the "finishinghouses" where pigs are fed from around 55 pounds to slaughtersize, there are from 1,200 to 2,500 hogs in a building. Emissionsof hydrogen sulfide and ammonia from excrement and urine are sostrong that large exhaust fans must run constantly to remove thetoxic gases from the houses. If the fans shut off for more than15 minutes, hogs begin succumbing to the gases.

In the heat of summer, the overcrowdedconditions in poultry operations lead to massive die-offs. Duringthe record breaking heat-wave last year in Texas, Oklahoma andArkansas, millions and millions of hens and broilers suffocatedin their packed cages. All the media focused on was the monetarylosses were to the owners and growers, not to the miserable deathsof millions of living creatures.

Chickens also suffer from the misfortunesof their owners or growers. In southwest Missouri, a bankruptpoultry house owner simply walked away and left 12,000 hens tostarve and die. Two years later, the skeletons of thousands ofhens remain packed in their little cages in a crumbling poultryhouse overgrown with weeds. A horror story in the best StephenKing tradition – and one that pretty much sums up industrial-strengthhog, chicken and egg production.

Ken Midkiff, formerly a hog farmer,now is the Director of the Missouri Sierra Club


ACall for Strong Enforcement of the Federal HumaneSlaughter Act

In 1958, following overwhelming publicsupport, the Humane Slaughter Act was adopted. In 1978, the FederalMeat Inspection Act was amended to empower USDA inspectors tostop the slaughter line on the spot if any cruelty is observed.Once the line has stopped, slaughter may not legally recommenceuntil deficiencies, whether of equipment, or of abuses by personnel,are corrected. Since that time the public has assumed that thelaw has been enforced. Gail Eisnitz' s 1997 book, Slaughterhouse(see AWI Quarterly Fall 1997), was a rude awakeningto the fact that deregulation had caused enormous speed-ups inthe slaughter line so that animals were no longer being slaughteredin conformity with the law. On the contrary, the book revealedthat fully conscious pigs and cows were being beaten, strangled,scalded, skinned and dismembered in the nation's slaughterhouses.

Two government reports, "Surveyof Stunning and Handling in Federally Inspected Beef, Veal, Pork,and Sheep Slaughter, Plants" January 7, 1997) and "SpecialSurvey on Humane Slaughter and Ante-Mortem Inspection" (March1998) provide further documentation of the failure of slaughterplants to handle and kill animals humanely. Many apparent violationsof federal law were found despite the fact that the these inspectionsof slaughter plants were announced in advance, providing ampleopportunity for plant managers to cover-up.

The 1997 report documented excessiveuse of electric prods, slippery floors and hazardous ramps, citing64% of the slaughter plants visited for ineffective use of captivebolt stunners to render animals unconscious and insensible. The1998 report noted that "it is considered inhumane to allowan animal to regain consciousness after the stunning procedure,so the bleeding should be done as quickly as possible after stunning."Yet, 57.6% of the plants permitted a lengthy period of time betweenstunning and bleeding. The report concludes that 28% of the plantsvisited have "serious problems." A detailed resolutioncalling for strong enforcement of the Humane Slaughter Act waspresented to the United States Animal Health Association's AnimalWelfare Committee by AWI's Director Cathy Liss. The USAHA representsfederal and state regulatory veterinarians throughout the nationand has done so since its founding in 1897. Seeking to quash attentionto this issue, a representative of the Livestock Marketing Associationobjected to virtually all of the text claiming it could not besubstantiated. The industry representative even objected to textcited from the two government studies, claiming that these studies,too, could not be substantiated. In the interest of obtainingthe necessary votes to adopt a resolution in support of the HumaneSlaughter Act, a compromise version was agreed. The final resolution,which appears in the box, was adopted by the Animal Welfare Committeeof the USAHA. On the following day it was adopted by the fullboard of the Association.


 

 RESOLUTION ADOPTED AT THE OCTOBER 1998 USAHA MEETING

THE UNITED STATES ANIMAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION ENCOURAGES STRONG EN-
FORCEMENT OF THE FEDERAL HUMANE SLAUGHTER ACT BY USDA's FOOD SAFETY AND
INSPECTION SERVICE TO PREVENT ABUSES TO ANIMALS PROTECTED UNDER THE ACT.

(The mission of USAHA is to be a forum for communication and coordination among state and federal
governments, universities, industry and other groups on issues of animal health and disease control, animal welfare, food safety and public health.)


EUBans Sub-therapeutic Use of Drugs

As of January, four widely used growth-enhancingantibiotic drugs will be banned for use in the European Union.

Unlike therapeutic or medicinal drugs,sub-therapeutic drugs are not used to help a sick animal recover,but rather to induce rapid and unnatural growth or keep a stressedanimal from dying while in cruel factory farms. Up to 80 percentof all Europe's cattle, sheep, pigs, and poultry are given sub-therapeuticantibiotics.

Britain, Sweden, Germany, and Franceled the campaign to exclude the use of the drugs as growth-enhancers.Three nations, Spain, Portugal, and Belgium abstained from thevote, arguing that the ban will push up the price of meat. Denmarkand Sweden already enforce a unilateral ban on sub-therapeuticdrugs.

Several large agencies, includingthe World Health Organization, The British House of Lords, andthe British National Consumer Council have spoken out againstsub-therapeutic drugs. The Soil Association, representing Britain'sorganic farmers, reports that the use of antibiotics had increasedby up to 150 times in the past 30 years. Their press release reads,"We must create a new climate in which animals are kept inmore natural, less stressful conditions and are routinely treatedwith respect, rather than antibiotics."


FACTORY FARMSDEEMED NOT ORGANIC

Controversy over the labelling of organicanimal products was resolved by a January 14, 1999 decision ofthe US Department of Agriculture. By early spring, stores willhave USDA certified products. The organic label means that animalshave not been confined to the dreadful factory farms wherethey are virtually immobilizedin tiny cages andstalls during their entire lives of painful imprisonment.Instead, the animals must have access to pasture, fresh air andsunshine and not be given growth hormones or sub-therapeutic antibiotics.


AWI Quarterly Fall/Winter1998-1999, Vol. 47/48, No. 4/1

Cow Rescue

A Cow Who Took Matters into HerOwn Hooves

Emily the cow was on her way to a slaughterhouse in Hopkinton,Massachusetts in November 1995, when she evidently decided shewould rather be free. The three-year-old, 1,400-pound holsteinheifer bravely leaped over a five-foot fence. For 40 days and40 nights following her daring escape, she managed to live inthe woods around the town, foraging for food and hobnobbing witha herd of deer.

As the escaped cow cleverly evaded capture, people began rootingfor her. Emily's partisans left out hay for her and shielded herwhereabouts from authorities and from the slaughterhouse's employees."Like some bovine pimpernel," reported People magazine,"she was sought everywhere but never captured."

Emily's story excited the interest of animal lovers Meg and LewisRanda, who have given many animals sanctuary at their Life ExperienceSchool, a school for children with special needs in Sherborn,Massachusetts. The A. Arena & Sons slaughterhouse ended upselling Emily to the Randas for $1, reasoning that the cow hadrun off much of her value.

Meg Randa, who took great care to assure Emily that she and herfamily were vegetarians, coaxed the elusive heifer into a trailerwith a bucket of feed. The Randas had their Christmas dinner outsidein the barn with Emily, who now lives, and serves as a teacher,at the Life Experience School.

This cow-rageous Holstein has become quite famous, as her storyhas appeared in countless newspaper and magazine articles, aswell as coverage by CBS and a forthcoming children's book. Thereare rumors of a film being planned, but Emily is keeping quietabout whether she is destined to become a ruminant movie star.

Emily has become something of a cult figure, as sympathizers havepledged in her presence to stop eating meat. She has also beenbovine-of-honor at a human wedding that took place in the Randas'barn.


AWI Quarterly Winter 1996, Vol. 45, No. 1, p. 12.

Birth Intervals in Cattle Raised for Meat: Belief and Fact

by Viktor and Annie Reinhardt

It is commonly believed that calves must be artificially weaned so thatthe cow gives birth at the most frequent possible intervals. We had theunique opportunity to question the justification of this belief by comparingthe reproductive performance of 18 cows who were allowed to raise theircalves beyond the age of natural weaning with the reproductive performanceof 96 other cows who were subjected to the traditional forced weaning managementsystem. Both categories of cows lived on the same ranch, in herds of approximately50 animals including two mature bulls per herd.

The calves of the "managed" cows were taken away from theirmothers at the age of about eight months and raised in separate groups.Shortly thereafter, the mothers were also removed from the original herdand re-grouped in other herds. These artificial disruptions of social relationshipswere extremely disturbing for the animals, and it took several days oreven weeks until they calmed down again and established new relationshipswith the members of the new groups.

The calves of the "semi-wild" cows were naturally weaned bytheir mothers: female calves at the age 7-12 months, male calves at theage of 9-14 months. The weaning did not impair in any way the affectionatebond between mother and calf. In fact, the mother-calf bond was the foundationof the herd's cohesive social structure (see photo).

The performance of cattle is usually assessed by calculating the timelapse between two births. This so-called calving interval averaged 388days in the semi-wild cows, versus 494 days in the managed cows.

The difference of 106 days was statistically significant, indicatingthat the performance was enhanced when the calves were allowed to staywith their mother rather than when they were artificially weaned by beingtaken away from the maternal herd.

The better performance of the semi-wild cows could not be attributedto different climatic or nutritional conditions. In contrast to the managedcows, however, the semi-wild cows lived in a stable social environment.It was probably this stability of the social environment that accountedfor the animals' better reproductive performance. Artificially breakingnot only the bond between mothers and their still nursing calves but alsofriendship relationships between the mothers and other herd members, apparently,constituted a severe stress situation for the managed cows which resultedin a depression of their reproduction.

The affectionate mother-calf bond
is the foundation of a cattle herd's
cohesive social structure. A study
by Viktor and Annie Reinhardt
suggests that the bond lasts for
life under natural conditions.
Here, cow Dora grooms her
eight-year old daughter Riese
while grandson Rick is taking
a nap. Photo by Viktor Reinhardt.

Our observations challenge the inertia of tradition, demonstrating thatreproduction of beef cattle is enhanced rather than reduced whencows are allowed to wean their calves at the biologically determined age.Interfering in biological processes may satisfy man's ambition to havecontrol over them, but this is bound to have unforeseen repercussions ifthe biological process is not properly understood. Interfering in the naturalweaning process of cattle not only inflicts avoidable emotional pain butit also unnecessarily diminishes the animal's natural reproductive potential.


AWI Quarterly Spring/Summer 1997, Volume 46, Numbers 2 &3

Syndicate content